|
|
 | | Re: Why the Star Wars license isn't always good for builders
|
| That's quite a rant. I am, however of a different opinion than you. I'm perfectly happy to prey on crazy Star Wars fanboys who pay a premium for the figs if it means I can buy a Star Wars set, use all the elements in it, and sell the figs on (...) (17 years ago, 7-Sep-08, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
| | | | | Why the Star Wars license isn't always good for builders
|
| It's entirely possible that this particular equine corpse has been beaten so many times that you could read newsprint through it, but I have to get this out. If it's already been discussed ad nauseum, please just move on. After browsing Bricklink (...) (17 years ago, 7-Sep-08, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Vignette - Requiem.
|
| (...) That would be three modern/future weapons. Star Wars is a long time ago. Cheers Richue Dulin CO Legeaux FUT .starwars, but please consider your FUT if replying. (17 years ago, 19-Aug-08, to lugnet.build.military, lugnet.starwars, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Unused "feature" in 7675 Clone Wars AT-TE?
|
| (...) Ironically, I have not yet had the chance to buy the motorized AT-AT (and I missed the first one), so I had not seen that a T-bar was built into that design as well. It does make me wonder, now, how exactly they got those lumbering beasts down (...) (17 years ago, 13-Aug-08, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Unused "feature" in 7675 Clone Wars AT-TE?
|
| (...) Well, you sorta got the link right, but the video is no longer available. If you are posting in Plain Text format, any full URL will automatically show up as a hyperlink (at least when viewed through the LUGNET website). If you're doing it in (...) (17 years ago, 13-Aug-08, to lugnet.starwars)
|
|
